Skip to content
Missouri Association of Area Agencies on Aging at a glanceAlso receives grants: funding profile →

· Public charity

Missouri Association of Area Agencies on Aging

Serve as a statewide entity to focus public and private attention on the changing needs and concerns of Missouri's elder population and establish a network for consumer outreach and assistance for public benefits.

$1.8M
Granted FY2025still arriving
12
Grants FY2025still arriving
1
States reached
$407k
Largest
01What it fundsRead
02The needRead
03Its granteesRead
04Its fieldRead
01What it funds
01100% classified

What it funded, over time

Every grant placed by its stated purpose and the recipient’s mission, by year, FY2021 to 2025.

Human Services$5.5MCommunity Improvement$623kPhilanthropy$252kHealth$130kHousing & Shelter$10kCivil Rights$10k
02FY2025 · 12 grants

Where the money goes

Grants by size, and the largest recipients.

How this is measured
The 12 grants below total $1,570,382, the rows itemized in this filing. The $1,758,820 headline is the total grant expense on the return; the other $188,438 is giving the schedule does not break out (grants under the $5,000 itemization floor, grants to individuals, grants on other schedules). Every figure below describes the itemized rows only.

By grant size · FY2025

  • $10k–50k3 grants · $88k
  • $50k–250k7 grants · $779k
  • $250k+2 grants · $704k
$99,095
Median grant
1
States reached
$1.1M
Total assets
Largest grants
RecipientAmount
Senior Age Area Agency on Aging$407,260
Aging Best$296,431
St Louis Area Agency on Aging$171,361
Mid-America Regional Council$133,152
Care Connection for Aging Services$112,102
Area Agency on Aging Region X$99,095
The Oasis Institute$89,595
Heart of Missouri United Way$89,586
Young at Heart Resources$83,833
Northeast Missouri Area Agency on Aging$45,027
United Way of the Ozarks$25,540
Aging Ahead$17,400
02The need
03

Does the money reach high-need areas?

Each grant placed by the hardship in its grantee’s ZIP, against the area’s typical level.

show:

Its human-services grants (FY21–25, $4.4M) land where the poverty rate runs at 16%, against an area that typically sits at 11%. 94% of those dollars go to grantees based in above-average-need neighborhoods. Most of its grants land in higher-need ZIPs.

area typical 11%Delta Center for Independent Living: $10k → 5%Disability Resource Association Inc: $10k → 9%Independent Living Resource Center Inc: $10k → 10%Care Connection for Aging Services: $246k → 14%SEMO Alliance for Disability Independence Inc: $10k → 14%Area Agency on Aging Region X: $175k → 15%Senior Age Area Agency on Aging: $417k → 15%Access II Independent Living Center: $10k → 15%Tri-County Center for Independent Living: $10k → 16%Aging Best: $348k → 17%Living Independently for Everyone: $10k → 19%Independent Living Center of Southeast Missouri: $10k → 20%Bootheel Area Independent Living Services: $10k → 26%Northeast Missouri Area Agency on Aging: $103k → 28%Care Connection for Aging Services: $112k → 14%Aging Matters: $52k → 14%Area Agency on Aging Region X: $99k → 15%Senior Age Area Agency on Aging: $407k → 15%Aging Best: $319k → 17%On My Own Inc: $10k → 18%Northeast Missouri Area Agency on Aging: $91k → 28%Care Connection for Aging Services: $98k → 14%Aging Matters: $48k → 14%Area Agency on Aging Region X: $43k → 15%Senior Age Area Agency on Aging: $351k → 15%Aging Best: $296k → 17%Northeast Missouri Area Agency on Aging: $45k → 28%Care Connection for Aging Services: $97k → 14%Aging Matters: $40k → 14%Senior Age Area Agency on Aging: $217k → 15%Aging Best: $119k → 17%Northeast Missouri Area Agency on Aging: $34k → 28%Care Connection for Aging Services: $87k → 14%Area Agency on Aging Region X: $10k → 15%Senior Age Area Agency on Aging: $121k → 15%The Oasis Institute: $90k → 11%West-Central Independent Living Solutions: $10k → 14%Northeast Missouri Area Agency on Aging: $8k → 28%The Oasis Institute: $90k → 11%Aging Best: $76k → 17%The Oasis Institute: $38k → 11%0%20%40%50%more need →
grant to an above-average-need area below average· circle size = grant amount
How this is measured
Matched: human-services grants are those whose grantee’s IRS cause code is Human Services. Placed by people below the poverty line in the grantee’s ZIP, averaged from the tracts in that ZIP.
How this is measured
US grants placed by each grantee’s ZIP, which can differ from where services are delivered. Need from public data (U.S. Census/ACS, CDC PLACES, Eviction Lab, USDA), shown as context about the area, never attributed to the funder’s giving.
03Its grantees
repeat funding

Who it funds again

Organizations funded in more than one year, against those funded once.

96%of every dollar goes to organizations it has funded before.
$6.3M · 13 repeat orgs$240k to everyone else

Grantees it renews have grown median revenue +25% since the first grant, against +21% for those funded once.

13 repeat relationships: 12 still active in FY2025, 1 since wound down.

How the two cohorts compare

Re-uppedFunded once

Organizations

13
24

Total granted

$6.3M
$240k

Median revenue growth · since first grant

+25%
+21%

Still filing today

85%
100%

New vs renewed · share of each year

In FY2025, 100% of grant dollars renewed an existing relationship; $0 went to new ones.

50%100%’21’22’23’24’25
RenewedFirst-time

Where new relationships form · theme of each grantee’s first grant

’21’22’23’24’25
Human ServicesHealthCommunity ImprovementHousing & ShelterArts & CultureCivil RightsOther
How this is measured
First-time means a grantee’s first year in the filing window; renewed means funded in an earlier year too. The renewed share climbs naturally as a portfolio matures, so the signal is a year that bucks it (a wave of new grantees). The earliest year is left-censored: relationships that predate the data read as new. Theme is the grantee’s IRS cause.

Backed again, and grew

  • SA
    SENIORAGE AREA AGENCY ON AGING
    5× · 2021–2025 · $1.5M · revenue +25%
  • CM
    CENTRAL MISSOURI AREA AGENCY ON AGING
    5× · 2021–2025 · $1.2M · revenue +55%
  • DI
    DISTRICT III AREA AGENCY ON AGING
    5× · 2021–2025 · $640k · revenue +17%

Funded once

  • PI
    PARAQUAD INC
    one grant, 2021 · $10k · revenue -10%
  • DC
    Delta Center for Independent Livinggraduated
    one grant, 2021 · $10k · revenue ×12
  • DR
    DISABILITY RESOURCE ASSOCIATION INC
    one grant, 2021 · $10k · revenue +15%
How this is measured

Repeat means funded in two or more distinct years. Growth and survival are read from each grantee’s own subsequent IRS filings.

04Its field

Closest unfunded matches

The nonprofits that most resemble its grantees but are not funded by it, scored along the direction from the rest of the field toward the portfolio. A resemblance in what they say they do, not a recommendation.

1
Achieving Independence and Mobility Cil

Independent living services for persons with disabilities.

Human Services
2
Southwest Louisiana Independence Center Inc

Direct care services to elderly and disabled; independent living care services.

Human Services
3
Colorado Springs Independence Center

We work with people with disabilities, their families and the community to create independence so that all may thrive.

Human Services
4
Lane Independent Living Alliance

To empower and develop leadership and independence, lane independent living alliance is a non-residential, consumer controlled organization serving people with physical, mental, cognitive and sensory disabilities.

Human Services
5
The Arkansas Center for Independence

Habilitation and residential services for adults with developmental disabilities

Human Services
6
Center for Independent Living

The mission of cilscpa is to empower people with disabilities to lead independent lives in their communities.

—
7
Illinois Valley Center for Independent Living

The illinois valley center for indepedent living advocates with compassion for the dignity and rights of people with disabilities and their familieis in our service area. we understand it is our consumer's right to choose what is best for…

Human Services
8
Center for Independence Inc

The Center for Independence promotes community solutions and empowers individuals with disabilities to live independently.

Human Services
9
Semo Alliance for Disability Independence Inc

Assistance of persons with disabilities

Human Services
10
Progress Center for Independent Living

Progress center for independent living is a consumer controlled, community-based, cross-disability, nonresidential, private nonprofit agency that has been designed by individuals with disa biilities to operate within suburban cook county,…

—
11
Independent Living Inc

To establish places of residence for adults who are developmentally disabled so as to enable them to have available an environment which is condusive to their becoming and remaining productive members in society.

—
12
Resource Center for Independent Living Inc

The organization is committed to working with individuals, families, and communities to promote independent living and individual choice to persons with disabilities.

Human Services
How this is measured
The grantee most central to the portfolio’s shape is Heartland Independent Living Center Inc; the most unlike its peers is Missouri Centers for Independent Living. Resemblance is measured on each organization’s own IRS 990 mission text; it reflects how work is described, not its quality or impact.
04the grantee network

35 grantees tracked through their own filings, 2017–2025.

Each grant beside the grantee’s revenue from every source, year by year.

How this is measured

Counted here: distinct organizations funded across 2017 to 2025, not grant rows in a single year, so this will not match the grant count on the cover. 35 of the 37 grantees resolved in that span have returns of their own we could reconcile.

Each grantee is resolved to its own IRS returns. Association, dated; never a causal claim.

1
Load-bearing (≥25% of a budget)
10
Early backer (in before they grew)
35/35
Grantees still filing
28/35
Grew since first funded

Where the money sits, by cause and then by grantee

SENIORAGE AREA AGENCY ON AGING: $1,513,785 · Human ServicesSENIORAGE AREA AGENCY ON AGINGCENTRAL MISSOURI AREA AGENCY ON AGING: $1,158,273 · Human ServicesCENTRAL MISSOURI AREA AGENCY ON AGINGDISTRICT III AREA AGENCY ON AGING: $639,983 · Human ServicesDISTRICT III AREA AGENCY ON AGINGAREA AGENCY ON AGING REGION X: $326,690 · Human ServicesAREA AGENCY ON AGING REGION XNORTHEAST MISSOURI AREA AGENCY ON AGING: $280,205 · Human ServicesNORTHEAST MISSOURI AREA AGENCY ON AGINGTHE OASIS INSTITUTE: $216,778 · Human Services+13 more: $260,693 · Human Services+13 moreCITY OF ST LOUIS: $569,725 · OtherCITY OF ST LOUISYOUNG AT HEART RESOURCES: $306,657 · OtherYOUNG AT HEART RESOURCESAging Ahead: $301,124 · OtherAging AheadHEART OF MISSOURI UNITED WAY INC: $201,006 · OtherHEART OF MISSOURI UNITED…+7 more: $70,000 · OtherMID-AMERICA REGIONAL COUNCIL COMMUNITY SERVICES CORPORATION: $623,040 · Community ImprovementMID-AMERIC…UNITED WAY OF THE OZARKS INC: $50,549 · PhilanthropyOZARK INDEPENDENT LIVING: $10,000 · HealthINDEPENDENT LIVING CENTER OF MID-MO: $10,000 · HealthHEARTLAND INDEPENDENT LIVING CENTER INC: $10,000 · Housing & ShelterTHE INDEPENDENT LIVING CENTER INC: $10,000 · Arts & CultureRURAL ADVOCATES FOR INDEP LIVING IN: $10,000 · Civil Rights
Human Services$4,396,407Other$1,448,512Community Improvement$623,040Philanthropy$50,549Health$20,000Housing & Shelter$10,000Arts & Culture$10,000Civil Rights$10,000

Each grantee by its size and the funder’s share of it; top left is load-bearing

25%50%75%100%$1.0M$10Mgrantee revenue →↑ funder's share of their budgetSENIORAGE AREA AGENCY ON AGING: $1,513,785 over 5y, 2.1% of budgetCENTRAL MISSOURI AREA AGENCY ON AGING: $1,158,273 over 5y, 2.2% of budgetDISTRICT III AREA AGENCY ON AGING: $639,983 over 5y, 3.0% of budgetMID-AMERICA REGIONAL COUNCIL COMMUNITY SERVICES CORPORATION: $623,040 over 5y, 5.5% of budgetAREA AGENCY ON AGING REGION X: $326,690 over 4y, 3.3% of budgetYOUNG AT HEART RESOURCES: $306,657 over 5y, 1.6% of budgetNORTHEAST MISSOURI AREA AGENCY ON AGING: $280,205 over 5y, 2.1% of budgetTHE OASIS INSTITUTE: $216,778 over 3y, 1.2% of budgetHEART OF MISSOURI UNITED WAY INC: $201,006 over 3y, 2.9% of budgetSOUTHEAST MISSOURI AREA AGENCY ON AGING INC: $140,693 over 3y, 0.5% of budgetUNITED WAY OF THE OZARKS INC: $50,549 over 2y, 1.3% of budgetPARAQUAD INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetDelta Center for Independent Living: $10,000 over 1y, 1.5% of budgetDISABILITY RESOURCE ASSOCIATION INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetMISSOURI CENTERS FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING: $10,000 over 1y, 32% of budgetWEST-CENTRAL INDEPENDENT LIVING SOLUTIONS: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetINDEPENDENT LIVING RESOURCE CENTER: $10,000 over 1y, 0.7% of budgetSEMO ALLIANCE FOR DISABILITY INDEPENDENCE FOUNDATION: $10,000 over 1y, 5.5% of budgetTRI-COUNTY CENTER FOR INDEPENDENT L: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetINDEPENDENT LIVING CENTER OF S E MO SOUTHEAST MISSOURI: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetHEARTLAND INDEPENDENT LIVING CENTER INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetBOOTHEEL AREA INDEPENDENT LIVING SERVICES INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetACCESS II - INDEPENDENT LIVING CENTER: $10,000 over 1y, 0.5% of budgetThe Whole Person Inc: $10,000 over 1y, 0.0% of budgetSOUTHWEST CENTER FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetNORTHEAST INDEPENDENT LIVING SERVICES: $10,000 over 1y, 0.4% of budgetTHE INDEPENDENT LIVING CENTER INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetLIFE INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetMIDLAND EMPIRE RESOURCES FOR INDEPENDENT LIVING INC (MERIL): $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetRURAL ADVOCATES FOR INDEP LIVING IN: $10,000 over 1y, 0.6% of budgetMISSOURI STATEWIDE INDEPENDENT LIVING COUNCIL: $10,000 over 1y, 12% of budgetON MY OWN INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budgetOZARK INDEPENDENT LIVING: $10,000 over 1y, 0.2% of budgetDISABLED CITIZENS ALLIANCE FOR INDEPENDENCE INC: $10,000 over 1y, 0.1% of budgetINDEPENDENT LIVING CENTER OF MID-MO: $10,000 over 1y, 0.3% of budget
Grantee by grantee: a decade per organization, before and after funding

A decade per grantee: revenue shaded, grants as bars, all rows on one timeline.

Co-funders

Grantmakers whose grantees overlap with this funder’s far more than size alone predicts. Closer means stronger alignment; arcs show where they also fund each other. Here they form a tightly interlocked group: most of these funders back each other's grantees too.

Mfa Oil FoundationChristopher Reeve Fou…Community Foundation …United Way of Greater…Meals on Wheels Ameri…Veterans United Found…Commerce Bancshares F…Ozarks Food Harvest I…National Council on A…St Louis Community Fo…Charities Aid Foundat…Amazonsmile Foundation
Mfa Oil FoundationMO17.5× affinity6 shared granteesties to 11 of 11Hover any node to trace its alignments.Compare side by side →

Open a dossier: Mfa Oil Foundation · Christopher Reeve Foundation · Community Foundation of the Ozarks Inc · United Way of Greater St Louis Inc · Meals on Wheels America · Veterans United Foundation · Commerce Bancshares Foundation · Ozarks Food Harvest Inc · National Council on Aging Inc · St Louis Community Foundation Inc · Charities Aid Foundation America · Amazonsmile Foundation

How this is measured
Affinity is a Gamma-Poisson posterior co-funding rate, re-centered on the typical rate, so thin evidence shrinks toward no signal. Overlap is association, not proof of shared intent.

How much its grantees rely on government

Each dot is one organization Missouri Association of Area Agencies on Aging funds: left to right is the share of its income from government, bottom to top the share from Missouri Association of Area Agencies on Aging. Bigger dots raise more.

2024
’20’21’22’23’24’25
no gov · 00%3%10%23%40%funder's share of their income ↑0%25%50%75%100%share of the org’s income from government →
    no gov moneyreceives it· size = income
    0get no government money at all
    21report government grants on their 990 we could not trace to a source (not plotted)
    0rely on government for over half their income
    typical government reliance, FY20–25
    How this is measured
    Government income is each org’s traced federal awards (USASpending grants and contracts) plus state payments (open checkbooks) as a share of its total revenue (IRS Form 990); the self-reported government-grant line (990 line 1e) is carried for cross-check: a grantee that reports government grants we could not trace to a source is left off the chart rather than shown as receiving none. An association, not a claim that a grant caused the public funding. Coverage is precision-first, a floor rather than a census; state records exist for 9 states, so a grantee outside them shows no state figure (dimmed) rather than a false zero. Federal award amounts are obligations, which can span years, so a single-year share is indicative. 990 filings lag 12 to 24 months.

    On method. Every financial figure here is read from IRS e-file XML, the funder’s own 990/990-PF, and from the multi-year returns of the 37 grantees we resolved, each linked to its source. Grantee outcomes are each organization’s own program-service reporting (Form 990, Part III), read as association with funding, never as caused by it. Low-confidence name matches are suppressed rather than guessed. How we build these →

    How this is measured
    Each figure carries one of six labels. Filed is what the funder reported on its return. Official is another government record about an organization, such as a federal award or a charity register, joined by name where no shared identifier exists. Resolved is an identity we worked out where the filing named a recipient without an EIN, kept only above a measured confidence threshold. Computed is arithmetic over those, like themes, portfolio clusters and co-funder strength. Context is a statistic about a place rather than about an organization, which is what the need overlay is: it describes the area a grantee’s address sits in, not where its work lands. Inferred is drawn by a model from text, like the partnerships read out of public news and organization websites. Each is labeled where it appears.

    Generated from the IRS Form 990 e-file return for fiscal year 2025, released 2025. Filings run roughly 12 to 24 months behind; figures are dated accordingly.

    Source object · view filing

    Play a game based on Missouri Association of Area Agencies on Aging’s filings →

    More from the funding graph

    The unnamed billions
    grants reported with no recipient in the public record
    The regranting layer
    51% of grant dollars land in the regranting layer
    The DAF merry-go-round
    $9.7B circulates between donor-advised funds
    The endowment market
    who holds foundation money, and what just moved
    The camps
    funders cluster by geography, not ideology
    By state
    where grant money is based, and what stays home